Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
JIYA LAL BHARDWAJ
Kashmir Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of HP – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to rejection of reengagement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner’s claim based on service continuity. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's analysis of submitted testimony and evidences. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. arguments against respondents' grounds for rejection. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. policy implications and obligations upon respondents. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 6. court's assessment of continued eligibility for reengagement. (Para 16 , 17) |
| 7. final order for reengagement and benefits. (Para 18) |
JUDGMENT :
Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, J.
The petitioner has laid challenge to an order dated 29.03.2017 (Annexure A-4), passed by respondent No.2, whereby the claim of the petitioner for his reengagement as DPE on Parents Teacher Association (for short ‘PTA’) basis has been rejected on the ground that neither the petitioner was covered under PTA-GIA nor his services were terminated by Enquiry Committee or on joining of regular incumbent.
2. The facts as emerge from the pleadings are that the petitioner who was having the qualification of Bachelor of Physical Education, was appointed as DPE on the recommendations of the PTA body vide office order dated 02.07.2007 (Annexure P-2) issued by respondent No
The court emphasized the need for fair reengagement practices for terminated employees, ruling that dismissal based on erroneous policy interpretation constitutes discrimination under Articles 14, 16....
Termination of PTA teacher's engagement without show cause notice, defying prior grant-in-aid directions, is arbitrary, violates natural justice and Article 14; mandates quashing and retrospective re....
Validly appointed PTA teacher, post-set-aside of termination, entitled to re-engagement with service continuity from initial engagement, contractual status after seven years, regularization w.e.f. 01....
Date of appointment for re-engagement eligibility under PTA policy is actual joining date, not initiation of selection process.
Termination of temporary employees requires adherence to natural justice principles, including the right to a hearing before punitive actions are taken.
The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to re-engagement under the policy as she was appointed after the cutoff date and failed to justify the delay in filing her petition.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
